Citation Nr: 0327342
Decision Date: 10/10/03 Archive Date: 10/20/03
DOCKET NO. 00-06 829 ) DATE
)
)
Perfect.
On appeal from the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Nashville,
Tennessee
THE ISSUE
Entitlement to service connection for post-traumatic stress
disorder (PTSD).
REPRESENTATION
Appellant represented by: Disabled American Veterans
ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD
B.E. Jordan, Counsel
INTRODUCTION
The veteran had active military service from September 1969
to November 1971.
This appeal to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) arises
from a rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs
(VA) Regional Office (RO) in Nashville, Tennessee.
In June 2001, the Board remanded this matter to the RO for
further development. The appeal has been returned to the
Board for appellate review.
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The veteran was not a combat veteran.
2. The veteran does not have a verifiable stressor.
3. The veteran's PTSD is not related to a disease or injury
in active military service.
CONCLUSION OF LAW
Post traumatic stress disorder was neither incurred in nor
aggravated by active military service. 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 1110,
1131, 5102, 5103, 5103A, 5107 (West 2002); 38 C.F.R.
§§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.304(f) (2003).
REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION
I. Veterans Claims Assistance Act
The Veterans Claims Assistance Act of 2000 (VCAA), made
significant changes in VA's duty to notify and assist
claimants for benefits administered by the Secretary. 38
U.S.C.A. §§ 5100, 5102, 5103, 5103A, 5107, 5126 (West 2002).
Such duties entail notifying claimants of forms and
information necessary to submit to complete and support the
claim, to provide necessary forms, and to assist the claimant
in the development of evidence. VA has promulgated
regulations implementing the VCAA. 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102,
3.156(a), 3.159 and 3.326(a) (2003).
VA must provide forms necessary to prosecute a claim for VA
benefits. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5102 (West 2002); 38 C.F.R. §
3.150(a) (2003). The appellant filed for compensation and
pension for service connection for PTSD in June 1999. Thus,
there is no issue as to the provision of a form or completion
of an application.
VA must notify the claimant of evidence and information
necessary to substantiate his claim and must tell him what
evidence VA will obtain and what is his responsibility to
provide. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5103(a) (West 2002); 38 C.F.R.
§ 3.159(b) (2002); Quartuccio v. Principi, 16 Vet. App. 183,
187 (2002).
In June 1999, VA informed the veteran of the evidence that he
needed to support his claim. He was asked to provide
specific details of his in-service stressful event to
include: (1) the dates, places, and units of assignment at
the time of the events; (2) a description of the events; (3)
medals or citations received as a result of the events; (4)
names and other identifying information concerning any other
individuals involved in the events. In addition, VA informed
the veteran that it had requested medical records from the
Murray County Regional Hospital. The veteran was instructed,
however, that it was his responsibility to ensure that all
evidence in support of his claim be received within 60 days.
In the June 2001 remand, the Board directed VA to inform the
veteran of the VCAA and to conduct additional development in
regard thereto. Specifically, the RO was directed to contact
the veteran for additional medical evidence that may be
pertinent to his claim, to obtain outstanding VA medical
records, and to advise the veteran to submit more specific
and any verifying information regarding his claimed
stressors.
In a letter dated in June 2001, VA informed the veteran of
his and VA's responsibilities and duties in the development
of the veteran's claim as required by the VCAA. VA indicated
that it would request, directly from the source, existing
evidence that is either in the custody of military
authorities or maintained by another Federal Agency and
attempt to obtain records maintained by State or local
governmental authorities and medical, employment, or other
non-government records pertinent to the claim. As to the
veteran's responsibilities, he was requested to provide the
names and addresses of all medical care providers who had
treated the veteran for PTSD since June 1999. The veteran
was informed that if he wanted assistance in obtaining non-VA
treatment records he should complete an authorization of the
release form. The veteran was also asked to provide more
specific and any verifying information regarding his claimed
stressors.
In statements in support of the claim dated in June 2001 and
July 2003, the veteran indicated that he had no additional
evidence to submit and that he could not provide any more
information regarding his stressors.
In a supplemental statement of the case dated in July 2003,
VA reitered its and the veteran's duties and responsibilities
in development of the veteran's claim as required by the VCAA
and provided the implemental regulations.
VA has discharged its duty to notify the claimant of the
evidence and information necessary to substantiate his claim.
VA must also make reasonable efforts to assist the claimant
in obtaining evidence necessary to substantiate the claim for
the benefit sought, unless no reasonable possibility exists
that such assistance would aid in substantiating the claim.
38 U.S.C.A. § 5103A(a) (West 2002); 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(c), (d)
(2003). Such assistance includes making every reasonable
effort to obtain relevant records (including private medical
records and those possessed by VA and other Federal agencies)
that the claimant adequately identifies to the Secretary and
authorizes the Secretary to obtain. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5103A(b)
and (c) (West 2002); 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(c)(1-3) (2003). All
service medical and personnel records and VA medical records
pertinent to the claim have been obtained and associated with
the file. In addition, the veteran has submitted VA medical
records to bolster his claim. VA has discharged its duty to
assist in obtaining evidence to substantiate the claim.
Assistance shall include providing a medical examination or
obtaining a medical opinion when such an examination or
opinion is necessary to make a decision on the claim. 38
U.S.C.A. § 5103A(d) (West 2002); 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(c)(4)
(2003). The veteran was provided VA PTSD examinations in
June 1999 and May 2000. Those examination reports contain
adequate clinical findings and opinions.
There is no indication in the claims file that evidence
exists that VA sought unsuccessfully. Consequently, this
case does not trigger VA's duty to notify the appellant of a
failure to obtain evidence from any source. 38 U.S.C.A.
§ 5103A(b)(2) (West 2002); 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(e) (2003).
The Board sees no areas in which further development may be
fruitful. The requirements of the VCAA have been
substantially met by the RO.
II. Service Connection
The veteran claims that he developed PTSD as a result of
service.
The veteran's service personnel records reflect that the
veteran served in the Republic of Vietnam from January 22,
1971, to October 26, 1971. He was assigned to A Co 34th
Engineer Battalion (construction). The veteran's military
occupational specialty (MOS) was a wheel vehicular repairman.
His awards and decorations include the Vietnam Service Medal,
the National Defense Service Medal, one Overseas Service Bar,
the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal, and the Marksman
Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar. These decorations are
not indicative of combat.
The veteran's service medical record beginning in August 1971
reflect that while stationed in Vinh Hung, the Republic of
Vietnam the veteran was cited for a number of disciplinarian
actions relating unauthorized drug use and failure to
adequately complete duties and assignments. He underwent a
psychiatric evaluation for possible administrative
separation. The report of a mental status evaluation showed
a diagnosis of character and behavior disorder and inadequate
personality disorder. The veteran was discharged from the
service in October 1971 due to unfitness: the veteran had
engaged in unauthorized use of drugs and failure to satisfy
his duties and responsibilities.
In a VA Administrative Decision, made in March 1981, it was
concluded that the veteran's period of service from September
10, 1969, through November 5, 1971, is considered to have
been issued under honorable conditions for VA purposes.
VA medical records beginning in May 1999 reflect that the
veteran was seen for symptoms associated with PTSD. In May
1999, the veteran was hospitalized with a history of anxiety,
depression, and alcohol and cocaine abuse. He complained of
anhedonia, poor energy, feeling run down, anxiety, and
stress. The veteran reported that he was not sleeping well
and that he was experiencing nightmares and flashbacks of
Vietnam. The diagnoses included Axis I-major depressive
disorder, history of alcohol and cocaine dependence, and rule
out PTSD.
In a statement in support claim dated in June 1999, the
veteran reported that on or about September 1970 he was
assigned to the 34th Engineer Battalion while stationed in
Vietnam. The veteran stated that he was involved in and
witnessed many casualties. He indicated he was driving a
truck that was attacked by the enemy and that several
servicemen were killed. He claimed that he almost drowned
when a boat he was in overturned and that he engaged in
combat with the enemy.
The report of a VA examination dated in June 1999 shows that
the veteran listed that his most severe lifetime traumas
occurred in 1977 when he was stabbed, when he struck four to
five cars in an automobile accident, and when he observed the
sudden violent deaths of a man in the street and of a friend
who was burned to death. As to service experiences, the
veteran described a number of events in which he participated
in the killing or observed the killing of both military and
personnel and civilians. At the conclusion of a mental
status evaluation, the examiner concluded that the veteran
met the criteria for PTSD. The examiner added that symptoms
were based on a number of military and civilian traumas.
Another VA psychological assessment dated in June 1999 shows
that the veteran reported having been exposed to combat while
service in Vietnam. The veteran said that he witnessed the
deaths of many people, that he gathered dead bodies, and that
he saw a friend get blown up. At the conclusion of a mental
status evaluation, the veteran was diagnosed as having Axis
I-PTSD, history of polysubtance abuse.
In a statement in support of claim dated in April 2000, the
veteran stated that from May to September 1971 his base camp
was "Camp Mousel" which was located near Vinh Hung. He
said that from May to September 1971, the camp was under
frequent attacks from snipers and that there were a number of
land mines. The veteran indicated that there were many
casualties, but he did not remember any names or dates.
When examined by VA in May 2000, the veteran reported that
two specific stressors that occurred during military service.
It was noted that the veteran had difficulty describing the
details of the events, but proceeded to elaborate when
reminded of the purpose of the evaluation. He described an
event when he and six others from his battalion were buried
under a tunnel for a number of hours and had to dig
themselves out, although they could hear others above them.
The veteran referred to an incident when he almost drowned.
The veteran made general references to occasions when he had
seen American soldiers killed by landmines while his
battalion worked on highways. The examiner administered a
combat exposure scale and the Minnesota Multiphasic
Personality Inventory (MMPI). The results of the combat
exposure scale were indicative of light to moderate combat
exposure. As to the MMPI results, the examiner found that
the veteran's responses provided an invalid profile because
of excessive symptom endorsement. The examiner found that the
veteran's profile may be indicative of a cry for help when a
person is under extreme distress without resources or may
suggest an attempt to portray exaggerated psychopathology.
After reviewing the veteran's claims file and conducting a
mental status examination and psychological studies, the
examiner provided the following opinion:
[The veteran] has previously reported symptoms of
PTSD, which are most notably documented in a
psychiatric evaluation completed on 6/1/99. While
he endorsed the presence of intrusive thoughts,
numbing, and hyperarousal at the time, his report
of precipitating stressors remained unclear. The
veteran's current description of being trapped in a
tunnel and nearly drowning in the Saigon River is
inconsistent with his emphasis on other (non-
military) traumatic experiences he reported during
his psychiatric evaluation. Furthermore, although
the veteran has been hospitalized in the past for
the presence of depressive and psychotic features,
these symptoms may be associated with the veteran's
chronic alcohol and substance abuse and the
consequences of those destructive behaviors, rather
than to military related trauma. It was unclear
whether his symptoms would persist in the absence
of alcohol and drug use (which he has never
sustained for a reasonable period i.e. 90 days or
more) and and/or remain at their current frequency
and intensity.
The doctor added,
In sum, the veteran has inconsistently reported
severe distress on several occasions, but his
current test profile appears exaggerated and the
nature or cause of his distress associated with
military-related trauma cannot be teased out from
his alcohol and substance abuse. Thus, a
definitive diagnosis cannot be made at this time
regarding his PTSD symptom severity and its
specific effects on his daily functioning.
The diagnostic impression included Axis I alcohol dependence,
cocaine abuse, cannabis abuse, depressive disorder, and PTSD
symptoms/ rule out disorder.
Subsequent VA outpatient treatment records reflect that the
veteran was diagnosed as having and received treatment for
PTSD.
In response to VA notification for a more detailed stressor
statement, the veteran in a statement in support of claimed
dated in June 2001, the veteran indicated that he could not
provide any more information to bolster his claim.
In June 2002, the RO attempted to verify the veteran's
stressors through the USASCURR. The USASCURR was provided a
copy of the veteran's service personnel records, and
stressors statements dated in June 1999 and April 2000, and a
copy of VA examination dated in May 2000. In response, the
director of USASCURR reported in June 2003 that the veteran's
stressors could not be verified because there was
insufficient stressors information. The director indicated
that dates within sixty days of stressor, specific locations,
full name of casualties, etc., would be required in order to
research the alleged stressors.
Analysis
Service connection may be granted for a disability resulting
from disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by active
military service. 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 1110, 1131 (West 2002); 38
C.F.R. §§ 3.303, 3.304 (2003).
Service connection for PTSD requires: (1) medical evidence
diagnosing PTSD, (2) medical evidence establishing a link
between current symptoms and an in-service stressor, and (3)
credible supporting evidence that the claimed in-service
stressor occurred. 38 C.F.R. § 3.304(f) (2003).
The Court set forth the analytical framework and line of
reasoning for determining whether a veteran was exposed to a
recognizable stressor during service, which, as discussed
above, is an essential element in a claim for service
connection for PTSD. See Zarycki v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 91
(1993). In Zarycki, it was noted that, under 38 U.S.C.A.
§ 1154(b), 38 C.F.R. 3.304(d) and (f), and the applicable
provisions contained in VA Manual 21-1, the evidence
necessary to establish the incurrence of a cognizable
stressor during service to support a claim of service
connection for PTSD will vary depending on whether the
veteran "engaged in combat with the enemy." See Hayes v.
Brown, 5 Vet. App. 60 (1993). The determination as to
whether the veteran "engaged in combat with the enemy" may
be made by considering military citations that expressly
denote as much. Doran v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 283, 289 (1994).
"Engaged in combat with the enemy" means that the veteran
actually took part in a fight or encounter with a military
foe or hostile unit of instrumentality. The phrase would not
apply to veterans who served in a general "combat area: or
"combat zone", but did not themselves engage in combat with
the enemy. VAOPGPREC 12-99.
The veteran has been diagnosed as having PTSD. Thus, the
determinative issue in this case is whether there is credible
supporting evidence that the claimed in-service stressor
occurred. For the reasons, as discussed in below, the Board
finds that the veteran has not submitted credible evidence of
the occurrence of a stressor.
The veteran asserts that he was involved in combat with the
enemy. The veteran's personnel records establish that the
veteran service during Vietnam Theatre of Operations, and the
VA examiner in May 2000 determined that the veteran was
exposed to combat. However, the veteran's records do not
indicate participation in combat. In addition, the veteran's
MOS was that of a vehicular wheel repairman. Therefore, the
Board finds that the veteran is not a veteran of combat.
Accordingly, the provisions of 38 U.S.C.A. § 1154(b) are not
for application in this case.
The veteran claims that he experienced a number of stressors
while serving in Vietnam. As to the veteran's claim that in
September 1970 he was involved in and witnessed many
causalities and that he almost drowned when a boat that he
was in overturned. The Board notes that this stressor is not
credible because the veteran was not stationed in Vietnam
until January 1971.
As to the veteran's remaining stressors, the veteran
indicated generally that he witnessed the deaths of many
civilians and military personnel and that his camp was under
mortar attack. The veteran indicated, however, that he
couldn't recall the names of the military personnel who were
fatally wounded. The veteran has also asserted that he was
trapped in a tunnel. These stressors are too general for
verification. Notably, the USASCURR could not verify the
veteran's stressors because of insufficient stressor
information. However stressful his military experience may
have been, the information provided by the veteran does not
provide enough specific information to allow for an adequate
corroboration of his alleged stressors. See, e.g., Fossie v.
West, 12 Vet. App. 1, 6 (1998).
Although health care professionals may have accepted the
veteran's account of this experience in service as correct,
the Board is not required to do the same, charged as it is
with the duty to assess the credibility and weight to be
given the evidence. The Board notes, however, that the
medical evidence also suggests that the veteran stressor's
may be linked to non-service factors. VA examiners in June
1999 and May 2000 provide that the majority of the veteran's
stressors are related to non-military events and
circumstances of the veteran's life. Even though the
evidence shows that the veteran has received diagnoses of
PTSD from some examiners who have connected their diagnoses
to his claimed stressors, this after the fact medical nexus
evidence is not enough upon which to base a grant of service
connection. See Moreau v. Brown, 9 Vet. App. 389, 396
(1996).
As explained above, the record of evidence does not reflect
that the veteran was engaged in combat with the enemy, and
there is no credible supporting evidence that his alleged in-
service stressors occurred, apart from the veteran's own
uncorroborated statements regarding his experiences during
service. Consequently, the claim for service connection for
PTSD, therefore, fails on the basis that all three elements
required for such a showing under 38 C.F.R. § 3.304(f), have
not been met. Under these circumstances, the Board
determines that the evidence does not show that the veteran
incurred PTSD as a result of his active duty service, or any
incident therein, and the preponderance of the evidence is
against entitlement to service connection for PTSD.
Accordingly, the appeal is denied. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(b)
(West Supp. 2002); 38 C.F.R. § 3.102; Gilbert v.Derwinski, 1
Vet. App. 49 (1990).
The veteran has also argued that his appeal should be granted
in light of the Court's holding in Pentecost v. Principi, 16
Vet. App. 124, (2002), which stated that a veteran only need
to "offer independent evidence of a stressful event that is
sufficient to imply his or her personal experience." He
uses this citation to support his argument that the continued
denial of his claim does not contemplate the fact that the
clinical evidence is positive for a confirmed diagnosis of
and continued treatment for PTSD. A closer examination of
the Pentecost decision distinguishes it from the facts of
this veteran's case. In Pentecost, the veteran offered
independent evidence in the form of unit records that
verified the veteran's descriptions of rocket attacks
occurring at the time he was assigned to that unit. The
Court found that the unit records were clearly credible
evidence that the rocket attacks had occurred as the veteran
had alleged, and that they clearly implied his personal
exposure.
In this veteran's case, he has not offered similar
independent evidence to support his claimed stressors. As
noted earlier in this decision, the fact that the veteran has
a diagnosis of PTSD is not alone determinative of whether
service connection is warranted. Moreau at 396. He lacks
credible supporting evidence that his claimed in-service
stressor(s) occurred as required by 38 C.F.R. §3.304(f).
ORDER
Service connection for PTSD is denied.
____________________________________________
MARJORIE A. AUER
Veterans Law Judge, Board of Veterans' Appeals
Department of Veterans Affairs
YOUR RIGHTS TO APPEAL OUR DECISION
The attached decision by the Board of Veterans' Appeals (BVA or Board) is
the final decision for all issues addressed in the "Order" section of the
decision. The Board may also choose to remand an issue or issues to the
local VA office for additional development. If the Board did this in your
case, then a "Remand" section follows the "Order." However, you cannot
appeal an issue remanded to the local VA office because a remand is not a
final decision. The advice below on how to appeal a claim applies only to
issues that were allowed, denied, or dismissed in the "Order."
If you are satisfied with the outcome of your appeal, you do not need to do
anything. We will return your file to your local VA office to implement
the BVA's decision. However, if you are not satisfied with the Board's
decision on any or all of the issues allowed, denied, or dismissed, you
have the following options, which are listed in no particular order of
importance:
? Appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims
(Court)
? File with the Board a motion for reconsideration of this decision
? File with the Board a motion to vacate this decision
? File with the Board a motion for revision of this decision based on
clear and unmistakable error.
Although it would not affect this BVA decision, you may choose to also:
? Reopen your claim at the local VA office by submitting new and
material evidence.
There is no time limit for filing a motion for reconsideration, a motion to
vacate, or a motion for revision based on clear and unmistakable error with
the Board, or a claim to reopen at the local VA office. None of these
things is mutually exclusive - you can do all five things at the same time
if you wish. However, if you file a Notice of Appeal with the Court and a
motion with the Board at the same time, this may delay your case because of
jurisdictional conflicts. If you file a Notice of Appeal with the Court
before you file a motion with the BVA, the BVA will not be able to consider
your motion without the Court's permission.
How long do I have to start my appeal to the Court? You have 120 days from
the date this decision was mailed to you (as shown on the first page of
this decision) to file a Notice of Appeal with the United States Court of
Appeals for Veterans Claims. If you also want to file a motion for
reconsideration or a motion to vacate, you will still have time to appeal
to the Court. As long as you file your motion(s) with the Board within 120
days of the date this decision was mailed to you, you will then have
another 120 days from the date the BVA decides the motion for
reconsideration or the motion to vacate to appeal to the Court. You should
know that even if you have a representative, as discussed below, it is your
responsibility to make sure that your appeal to Court is filed on time.
How do I appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims?
Send your Notice of Appeal to the Court at:
Clerk, U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims
625 Indiana Avenue, NW, Suite 900
Washington, DC 20004-2950
You can get information about the Notice of Appeal, the procedure for
filing a Notice of Appeal, the filing fee (or a motion to waive the filing
fee if payment would cause financial hardship), and other matters covered
by the Court's rules directly from the Court. You can also get this
information from the Court's web site on the Internet at
www.vetapp.uscourts.gov, and you can download forms directly from that
website. The Court's facsimile number is (202) 501-5848.
To ensure full protection of your right of appeal to the Court, you must
file your Notice of Appeal with the Court, not with the Board, or any other
VA office.
How do I file a motion for reconsideration? You can file a motion asking
the BVA to reconsider any part of this decision by writing a letter to the
BVA stating why you believe that the BVA committed an obvious error of fact
or law in this decision, or stating that new and material military service
records have been discovered that apply to your appeal. If the BVA has
decided more than one issue, be sure to tell us which issue(s) you want
reconsidered. Send your letter to:
Director, Management and Administration (014)
Board of Veterans' Appeals
810 Vermont Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20420
VA
FORM
JUN
2003
(RS)
4597
Page
1
CONTINUED
Remember, the Board places no time limit on filing a motion for
reconsideration, and you can do this at any time. However, if you also plan
to appeal this decision to the Court, you must file your motion within 120
days from the date of this decision.
How do I file a motion to vacate? You can file a motion asking the BVA to
vacate any part of this decision by writing a letter to the BVA stating why
you believe you were denied due process of law during your appeal. For
example, you were denied your right to representation through action or
inaction by VA personnel, you were not provided a Statement of the Case or
Supplemental Statement of the Case, or you did not get a personal hearing
that you requested. You can also file a motion to vacate any part of this
decision on the basis that the Board allowed benefits based on false or
fraudulent evidence. Send this motion to the address above for the
Director, Management and Administration, at the Board. Remember, the Board
places no time limit on filing a motion to vacate, and you can do this at
any time. However, if you also plan to appeal this decision to the Court,
you must file your motion within 120 days from the date of this decision.
How do I file a motion to revise the Board's decision on the basis of clear
and unmistakable error? You can file a motion asking that the Board revise
this decision if you believe that the decision is based on "clear and
unmistakable error" (CUE). Send this motion to the address above for the
Director, Management and Administration, at the Board. You should be
careful when preparing such a motion because it must meet specific
requirements, and the Board will not review a final decision on this basis
more than once. You should carefully review the Board's Rules of Practice
on CUE, 38 C.F.R. 20.1400 -- 20.1411, and seek help from a qualified
representative before filing such a motion. See discussion on
representation below. Remember, the Board places no time limit on filing a
CUE review motion, and you can do this at any time.
How do I reopen my claim? You can ask your local VA office to reopen your
claim by simply sending them a statement indicating that you want to reopen
your claim. However, to be successful in reopening your claim, you must
submit new and material evidence to that office. See 38 C.F.R. 3.156(a).
Can someone represent me in my appeal? Yes. You can always represent
yourself in any claim before VA, including the BVA, but you can also
appoint someone to represent you. An accredited representative of a
recognized service organization may represent you free of charge. VA
approves these organizations to help veterans, service members, and
dependents prepare their claims and present them to VA. An accredited
representative works for the service organization and knows how to prepare
and present claims. You can find a listing of these organizations on the
Internet at: www.va.gov/vso. You can also choose to be represented by a
private attorney or by an "agent." (An agent is a person who is not a
lawyer, but is specially accredited by VA.)
If you want someone to represent you before the Court, rather than before
VA, then you can get information on how to do so by writing directly to the
Court. Upon request, the Court will provide you with a state-by-state
listing of persons admitted to practice before the Court who have indicated
their availability to represent appellants. This information is also
provided on the Court's website at www.vetapp.uscourts.gov.
Do I have to pay an attorney or agent to represent me? Except for a claim
involving a home or small business VA loan under Chapter 37 of title 38,
United States Code, attorneys or agents cannot charge you a fee or accept
payment for services they provide before the date BVA makes a final
decision on your appeal. If you hire an attorney or accredited agent within
1 year of a final BVA decision, then the attorney or agent is allowed to
charge you a fee for representing you before VA in most situations. An
attorney can also charge you for representing you before the Court. VA
cannot pay fees of attorneys or agents.
Fee for VA home and small business loan cases: An attorney or agent may
charge you a reasonable fee for services involving a VA home loan or small
business loan. For more information, read section 5904, title 38, United
States Code.
In all cases, a copy of any fee agreement between you and an attorney or
accredited agent must be sent to:
Office of the Senior Deputy Vice Chairman (012)
Board of Veterans' Appeals
810 Vermont Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20420
The Board may decide, on its own, to review a fee agreement for
reasonableness, or you or your attorney or agent can file a motion asking
the Board to do so. Send such a motion to the address above for the Office
of the Senior Deputy Vice Chairman at the Board.
VA
FORM
JUN
2003
(RS)
4597
Page
2